Skip to main content

SOSMA: When politics triumph over national security concerns (Part 1)

 A MOTION to extend the enforcement of a sub-section of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (SOSMA) 2012 to continue the powers to detain suspects for up to 28 days without trial was defeated at the Parliament recently.

The motion was defeated by 86 MPs from the opposition bloc, while 85 MPs voted in favour. The 50 MPs who did not vote included Pekan MP Datuk Seri Najib Razak, Bagan Datuk MP Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Pagoh MP Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.

They are all previous prime ministers and a deputy prime minister, which is interesting. They played a key role in the passage of this law at the Parliament. Their absence during the vote has sparked a lot of speculation and scepticism about their intentions.

In essence, security laws are crucial to maintaining the peace and security of any nation. These laws have a purpose but the problem is always with those who are entrusted with enforcing them, not with the laws themselves.

As a result, I’m perplexed as to whether the MPs who voted against the motion, as well as those who were absent, understand the severity or implications of this move for our country’s security.

Furthermore, Opposition MPs cited several reasons for voting against the motion, including the provisions that prevent courts from acting as a check and balance, the lack of a requirement to produce a suspect before a magistrate’s court for an extension of a remand order under SOSMA… and the fact that SOSMA was allegedly used as a political tool.

Interestingly, these MPs are from the former Pakatan Harapan administration, which ruled Malaysia for 22 months.

So, why did they not take the required steps to establish an oversight body that is accountable to Parliament to ensure that these laws are adequately enforced and that any abuses are reported to the aforementioned body for reprimand?

In any case, the loss of this motion, in my opinion, will have an adverse influence on our country’s security landscape, especially with the Taliban’s rise in Afghanistan, which has bolstered spirit among terrorist groups globally including Malaysia.

As a result, law enforcement agencies like the Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) must be given the tools they need, including appropriate laws. This will allow them to carry out their responsibilities without fear of reprisal, ensuring the nation’s peace and security.

Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA)

Under Article 149 of the Federal Constitution, SOSMA was constituted to counter internal security challenges like as public order, terrorism, sabotage and espionage.

The police have the ability to arrest and detain a person for 24 hours and to prolong the detention duration to 28 days, according to the legislation.

Moreover, persons arrested under SOSMA are not eligible for bail and they will be held in custody until all legal proceedings, including appeals, are completed.

 

Section 4 of SOSMA empowers police officers to arrest and detain anyone who poses a threat to the nation’s public order and security.

For example, subsection 4(5) states that “Notwithstanding subsection (4), a police officer of or above the rank of Superintendent of police may extend the period of detention for a period of not more than twenty-eight days, for the purpose of investigation.”

This means that under this provision, the police have the authority to arrest a person suspected of being involved in terrorist activities for a period of up to 28 days for the purpose of investigation.

“Subsection (5) shall be reviewed every five years and shall cease to have effect unless, upon the review, a resolution is passed by both Houses of Parliament to extend the period of operation of the provision,” according to Subsection 4 (11).

Subsection 4 (5) is reviewed every five years and ceases to have effect when both Houses of Parliament agree not to extend it. On July 31, the existing extension will come to an end.

Anyone apprehended for alleged threats to national security, acts of terrorism or trafficking in persons, for example, will no longer be subject to the maximum detention of 28 days from that day.

The arrests of suspects under SOSMA, according to Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Acryl Sani Abdullah, are mainly for offences that are intricate in nature. As a result, he said, the PDRM will hold and remand suspects who are under investigation using provisions from current laws, such as the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC).

In addition, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin concurred with the IGP, emphasising that obtaining evidence from detainees during the collection of relevant evidence for prosecution purposes, including tracking down accomplices who are still at large, is difficult and time-consuming in cases involving security offences, particularly terrorism and organised crime.

Even if Subsection 4(5) evoked memories of the Internal Security Act of 1960, there is a check and balance in place and both Houses of Parliament must concur.

Because the cases examined under SOSMA are complicated, extra time is required for the police to finish their investigation without interference.

In reality, dealing with terrorists and organised crime is not as straightforward as we might believe because it entails a variety of different ball games to obtain information in preventing future attacks or operations.

Law abuse?

Although there are concerns that SOSMA will be used as a political tool, Hamzah claims that those who oppose the extension are allowing terrorists and criminals to sway. He disputed that SOSMA had been exploited for political motives.

He further pointed out that no one can be imprisoned or detained solely because of their political beliefs or actions, as stated in Subsection 4(3). He also stated that he would never use the law against politicians. He emphasised that “We” should never do such a thing. It is worth noting who he refers to as “We.”

 

In addition, Hamzah stated that between 2016 and January of this year, 3,717 people were arrested under SOSMA. There were 400 people charged with being involved with terrorist groups and 1,030 people charged with being involved with organised crime. He further stated that from 2017 and 2022, a total of 126 people were charged with terrorism.

In contrast, Pakatan’s Akmal Nasir maintains at the Parliament that just 648 of the 3,717 persons detained under SOSMA have been charged. He said that about 80% of those arrested had yet to be charged, and that some SOSMA detainees had been incarcerated without charge due to the Government’s failure to prosecute them.

This MP’s reasoning is somewhat plain, ignoring how terrorists and their networks have evolved and operated since Sept 11 attacks.

Malaysia itself saw its own terror attack in 2016. Following this attack, the Special Branch foiled numerous attempts by local terrorist groups to carry out attacks. They were able to do so because of their well-functioning intelligence apparatus, which included SOSMA.

One of the important tool for them is Subsection 4(5) which was not renewed recently.

Despite the fact that the IGP has declared that the police will utilise other available legislation to combat these threats, the Pandora’s Box has already been opened for terrorist groups to expand their operations in Malaysia.

The legislators who voted against this provision must be naive. For instance, the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA) was enacted to control and prevent organised crime in Malaysia by focusing on criminals, members of secret societies, terrorists, and other undesirables. It gives police the authority to arrest and detain a person for up to 60 days without charge or trial.

Ensuing the 60-day detention, the detainee’s case would be heard by the Prevention of Crime Board, which has the authority to sentence the detainee to no more than two years in prison and may extend the sentence if additional detention is necessary to protect public order, public security or crime prevention.

The board can also issue a restraining order or release a person. POCA was updated in 2015 to cover terrorism. – March 27, 2022

Source: https://focusmalaysia.my/sosma-when-politics-triumph-over-national-security-concerns-part-1/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Terrorism in Africa

According to state.gov, ISIS was defeated a few years ago. However, the organization's presence and existence remain conspicuous in Africa. Ongoing conflicts in Somalia, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Nigeria, and Burkina Faso demonstrate that ISIS has shifted its focus away from Iraq and Syria. Although ISIS lacks a clear hierarchy like Al-Qaeda, its followers and supporters wholeheartedly believe in its strong ideology. In 2014, the United States led the formation of a broad international coalition known as 'The Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS' to combat the organization during the height of the Syrian and Iraqi conflict. The primary objectives of this 83-member coalition are to degrade and defeat ISIS, which poses a threat to international peace and security. ISIS has brought thousands of foreign fighters from around the world to combat zones like Syria and Iraq, and it has used technology to promote its violent extremist ideology and instigate terrorist attacks. For example, t

Sedition Act 1948 should have been repealed a long time ago. But why?

THE Sedition Act 1948 is a legislative measure that was enacted in Malaysia during the colonial era, designed to curb any form of speech or expression that was deemed to be seditious in nature with the aim of maintaining public order and security. The Sedition Act has been subject to much debate and criticism, with some arguing that it is a violation of freedom of speech and expression. Despite this, the Act remains in force in Malaysia to this day, albeit with some amendments made over the years. Although I concur with the abolition of this Act, it is imperative that a comparable new legislation be enacted to address the escalating prevalence of racially and religiously bigoted remarks that have been unsettling our distinctive multicultural and multi-religious society as of late. An instance that exemplifies the prudent decision-making of the governing body is the substitution of the Internal Security Act of 1960 with the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA). This rep

THE HISTORY OF TERRORISM: MORE THAN 200 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT

The history of terrorism dates back at least 1500 years when Jewish resistance groups (66 - 72 A.D.) known as Zealots killed Roman soldiers and destroyed Roman property. The term assassin comes from a Shi'ite Muslim sect (Nizari Isma'ilis - also known as hashashins "hashish-eaters") fighting Sunni Muslims (1090 - 1275) and during Medieval Christendom resisting occupation during the Crusades (1095-1291). The hashashins were known to spread terror in the form of murder, including women and children. The brotherhood of Assassins committed terror so as to gain paradise and seventy-two virgins if killed and to receive unlimited hashish while on earth. The modern development of terrorism began during the French Revolution's Reign of Terror (1793 - 1794). During this period the term terrorism was first coined. Through the past two hundred years, terrorism has been used to achieve political ends and has developed as a tool for liberation, oppression, and i